EVE Search - Dear CCP, RE: speed changes....

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Dear CCP, RE: speed changes....

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
IRevolution	Posted - 2008.08.02 13:23:00 - [31] ok.... nobody has answered this but does anybody know what is happening with the 'thorax' or 'diemos' Crusier skill bonus to the ship? '-5% per level to the capacitor penalty of micro warp drives' ?? the new t2 mwd does -17% capacitor penalty... so bascially that skill bonus to the thorax class is useless at level 5 now that mwd dont take -25% cap anymore. that should be fixed and not ignored for the thorax.
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2008.08.02 13:25:00 - [32] Edited by: Jim McGregor on 02/08/2008 13:26:13 Originally by: IRevolution ok.... nobody has answered this but does anybody know what is happening with the 'thorax' or 'diemos' Crusier skill bonus to the ship? '-5% per level to the capacitor penalty of micro warp drives' ?? the new t2 mwd does -17% capacitor penalty... so bascially that skill bonus to the thorax class is useless at level 5 now that mwd dont take -25% cap anymore. that should be fixed and not ignored for the thorax. You could very well be gaining cap, depending on how the math works behind the skill. Needs testing on sisi. --- Originally by: Roguehalo Can you nano Titans?
Zeba Minmatar Pator Tech School	Posted - 2008.08.02 13:43:00 - [33] Originally by: MotherMoon sorry if I didn't make it clear I was talking without extra mods, just basic MWD or afterburner tests, no overdrives. Ahh. KK. You are correct that intys on sisi are right about the same speed as they are on tq without any speed mods. Unfortunately the nerfed speed mods that are an intys tank won't help the inty out when its getting trashed by missiles and drones. Easiest way to boost inty speed without mucking up the new speed mod stats or boosting its normal speed to compensate or all that drone and missile retooling would be to reduce their mass. Base speed will stay the same but under mwd and ab you get the nice top speed and still nerf hacs and recons to sane speeds. And no problem with giving out the no-spin info to you Jim. Taking S&M posts at face value is like asking your bookie for a tip on who to bet on. The odds are gonna be pretty good that its not a winner. Solution for the Rax. Remove the mwd bonus and replace it with a web strength bonus. inappropriate signature. ~WeatherMan
Tobin Shalim Vulcan Foundry United Star Federation	Posted - 2008.08.02 22:04:00 - [34] Done. And I can't see CCP as going and rebalancing the whole weapon mechanics for fixing what was broken (inty's) with this patch in mind. Couldn't the same effect still be done by instead applying a stacking penalty to all ships for OD's and Nano's, minus the interceptor-class ships? This way we can still stack mods without penalty, the Snakes are still nerfed and a more general balance is achieved still. You eliminate the nano problem, but still have the interceptors retain their primary advantage/tank. ----- Originally by: Haakkon I feel a great deal of patriotism at being a part of Goonswarm. We've accomplished great things... we're just mainly jerks about it
IRevolution	Posted - 2008.08.03 04:29:00 - [35] Originally by: Tobin Shalim Done. And I can't see CCP as going and rebalancing the whole weapon mechanics for fixing what was broken (inty's) with this patch in mind. Couldn't the same effect still be done by instead applying a stacking penalty to all ships for OD's and Nano's, minus the interceptor-class ships? This way we can still stack mods without penalty, the Snakes are still nerfed and a more general balance is achieved still. You eliminate the nano problem, but still have the interceptors retain their primary advantage/tank. I Agree.
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.03 08:33:00 - [36] If this patch goes live you are better of using a fast t1 frigate to tackle. Just as effective at a fraction of the cost. Vote against the nano nerf!
Liam Liam	Posted - 2008.08.03 08:55:00 - [37] I always did use T1 frigates for tackiling ... Isn't that what they're for ?
Laimes Berns	Posted - 2008.08.03 09:05:00 - [38]
Tobin Shalim Vulcan Foundry United Star Federation	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:59:00 - [39] In response to people that have invited me to go on Sisi and see how the changes would effect my interceptor, I have done so. My skills are an exact mirror (trained them up on Sisi to match TQ's skills), my modules are all exactly the same, and I'm running the exact same fit on TQ as I am on Sisi with just T2 gear (I am unable to acquire a Gistii-B type 1mn MWD on Sisi). No implants were used. The results: TQ: 6,715m/s Sisi: 4,596m/s The difference in loss: 2,119m/s THIS is what I was talking about in my OP and why I was so concerned about these changes; they have totally nerfed interceptors as a viable class of ship to use. We now travel SO slowly that there will be no problem in missiles/drones/GUN TRACKING being able to hit us the second we get into warp scram range. The interceptor has now been totally nerfed as a viable PvP class ship as it will now easily be hit+blown up by just about anything out there. Do you devs not realize that speed is OUR tank? That we rely on things not being able to hit us as a battleship relies on its shields/armor? You MUST rethink this nano nerf and how it will apply to interceptor pilots before it goes on TQ. Your dev blog about how it will make the interceptors viable again is WRONG, and as an inty pilot, I strongly urge you to take a look at how it effects us.
Richard Angevian The Crusaders.	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:12:00 - [40] Originally by: Lui Kai Re-read the blog. Look at the chart again. This is an interceptor buff. In the current version, my interceptor can reach 7.5k without gang or other bonuses. On Sisi, that same interceptor can't reach 5K. That is a NERF, not a buff. Intys should be the ONLY ships reaching insane speeds, because that is their ROLE. They are also paper thin and basically lack the DPS to kill anything except another frigate. Their job is to overtake and tackle. What is broken is when ships much larger and able to dish out lots more damage than a little, fragile, inty can reach similar or greater speeds. This patch actually doesn't even fix THAT. Nanos will be even more dominant, believe it or not.
Richard Angevian The Crusaders.	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:17:00 - [41] Originally by: Tobin Shalim In response to people that have invited me to go on Sisi and see how the changes would effect my interceptor, I have done so. My skills are an exact mirror (trained them up on Sisi to match TQ's skills), my modules are all exactly the same, and I'm running the exact same fit on TQ as I am on Sisi with just T2 gear (I am unable to acquire a Gistii-B type 1mn MWD on Sisi). No implants were used. The results: TQ: 6,715m/s Sisi: 4,596m/s The difference in loss: 2,119m/s THIS is what I was talking about in my OP and why I was so concerned about these changes; they have totally nerfed interceptors as a viable class of ship to use. We now travel SO slowly that there will be no problem in missiles/drones/GUN TRACKING being able to hit us the second we get into warp scram range. The interceptor has now been totally nerfed as a viable PvP class ship as it will now easily be hit+blown up by just about anything out there. Do you devs not realize that speed is OUR tank? That we rely on things not being able to hit us as a battleship relies on its shields/armor? You MUST rethink this nano nerf and how it will apply to interceptor pilots before it goes on TQ. Your dev blog about how it will make the interceptors viable again is WRONG, and as an inty pilot, I strongly urge you to take a look at how it effects us. Exactly. Add to that the balloon of sig radius when you activate your MWD and you will see inty's instapopped. Interceptors were fine as is, they didn't need to be "fixed". What needs to be fixed are much larger ships getting the same advantages out of modules and mods (nano, polycarb, etc) that tiny ones like intys do. This fix doesn't even really fix that. Does it really matter that a vagabond will only run at 3.5K when the game's dedicated tackler (interceptor) is only 1K faster? Also everyone else got slowed down, battleships handle like dreadnoughts. Nanos will be JUST as dominant as they are now, perhaps moreso, which is the true irony of this very ill thought out update.
Tobin Shalim Vulcan Foundry United Star Federation	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:53:00 - [42] Edited by: Tobin Shalim on 03/08/2008 21:54:19 I went and tested the Sisi setup against a Rupture, a cruiser-class ship that I have NO problems tanking on TQ (tested after my Sisi fight). The result: I died. Fast. Now there's a serious problem when a ship that I had no problems speed tanking on the TQ server destroyed me in 15 seconds on Sisi using their speed nerf there. Does anyone else see how that's a serious problem to an entire class of ship? Side note: Yes, I am aware that MWD's kill your sig radius allowing you to be easier to hit, that was the whole point of the module in the first place, a tradeoff for using it. However, we were able to somewhat negate that by applying massive amounts of speed to even things out with the sig radius penalty. Sure, we were hard to hit, but that is the POINT of inty's. Now with the speed nerf, we are losing our speed, but still have a massively increased sig radius, which basically means that if we try tackling, we're damn near instapopped.
Ash Vincetti Decorum Inc Tygris Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:33:00 - [43] I've been asking the same question over in game development here: Thread My concerns are very similar. I've been finding it exceedingly difficult to tackle anything medium sized. Ruptores, Zealots and Eagles are particularly deadly. Anything anti-support will simply wipe the floor with you. It's pretty hard to go through the cruisers ffa without getting bbq'd, even while keeping transversal up and flying manually. I'm afraid that for the purpose of "tackling a battleship so the blob can land on it", a t1 frig now does the same job equally as good. And for fleet v fleet skirmishes, it's pretty much suicide to bring an interceptor. It's just not survivable enough. I do hope that interceptors get a 2nd look, but as they are right now, they haven't been buffed. Yes, maybe 1v1 against t1 frigates they've received a buff. And just maybe, 1v1 vs battleships, they have been slightly buffed. unless the BS has warriors. or neuts. ----- free bree!
Raather	Posted - 2008.08.03 23:10:00 - [44] Edited by: Raather on 03/08/2008 23:11:33 Originally by: Stab Wounds Edited by: Stab Wounds on 02/08/2008 09:32:07 Originally by: Nova Fox 6km/s on a frigate is good, that means he cant solo a whole fleet anymore. This. Intys weren't meant to be solowtfpwn mobiles that they are today. They needed a nerf badly. Try thinking and fitting ABs and Scramblers. Did you seriously just try to say that Interceptors are solopwnmobiles? Edit: Just looked through your post history and saw your a huge troll supporting anything to do with the nano-nerf, no matter how stupid it is.
Gimpb	Posted - 2008.08.03 23:14:00 - [45] Honestly, I don't think the changes you mentioned are really going to affect inties in a negative way after all the dust settles, they're going to come out the clear speed kings. What I do think will hurt them in a big way is the MWD warmup, I'm very surprised you didn't mention that.
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. eXceed.	Posted - 2008.08.03 23:28:00 - [46] Originally by: Gimpb Honestly, I don't think the changes you mentioned are really going to affect inties in a negative way after all the dust settles, they're going to come out the clear speed kings. What I do think will hurt them in a big way is the MWD warmup, I'm very surprised you didn't mention that. Except that an inty doing 6kms will get slaughtered if he tries to close with an enemy fleet. Anything under 8kms is too slow for them really. Going faster thab your enemy is irrelevant if your life expectancy under fire is about 3 seconds because you're not fast enough to avoid taking damage.
Stab Wounds Caldari State Protectorate	Posted - 2008.08.03 23:59:00 - [47] Originally by: Malachon Draco Originally by: Gimpb Honestly, I don't think the changes you mentioned are really going to affect inties in a negative way after all the dust settles, they're going to come out the clear speed kings. What I do think will hurt them in a big way is the MWD warmup, I'm very surprised you didn't mention that. Except that an inty doing 6kms will get slaughtered if he tries to close with an enemy fleet. Anything under 8kms is too slow for them really. Going faster thab your enemy is irrelevant if your life expectancy under fire is about 3 seconds because you're not fast enough to avoid taking damage. 5-6km/sec is invulnerable to almost any type of fire.
Stab Wounds Caldari State Protectorate	Posted - 2008.08.03 23:59:00 - [48] Originally by: Liam Liam I always did use T1 frigates for tackiling ... Isn't that what they're for ? this
Gordon Red SteelVipers Ev0ke	Posted - 2008.08.04 01:04:00 - [49] Dear CCP, reduce the mass of the interceptors! Not only that they are to slow, their low acceleration is also a big problem! There is no real difference between each race and type of an interceptor, they fly nearly all at the same speed now. Good skills should matter, too. There should be a differnce between a noob and a veteran. Also it does not matter, if you pimped your interceptor or you have "fail" setup. The speed is higher, if I pimp my interceptor, but not much (~500-700m/s) => there is nearly no point to invest in rigs/faction mods/imps. A lot of diversity is thrown overboard, that's a real pitty!
Richard Angevian The Crusaders.	Posted - 2008.08.04 01:26:00 - [50] When this patch hits, Intys are DONE. Our role has already been taken over by Dictors and Hictors, will be even more so after this. All we have right now is extreme speed, agility, and the ability to tackle a single target. GONE after this because we are 40% slower, and anyone with a Caracal can kill us in a couple volleys. Intys will soon join the assault frigate in the scrapheap of useless T2 ships.
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.04 01:29:00 - [51] Originally by: Stab Wounds Intys weren't meant to be solowtfpwn mobiles that they are today. They needed a nerf badly. Try thinking and fitting ABs and Scramblers. lol troll. If your mwding inty gets popped in 15 seconds why would you want a AB inty that cant intercept anything and gets popped in 10 seconds instead? Vote against the nano nerf!
GallenteCitizen3208467	Posted - 2008.08.04 02:04:00 - [52] Originally by: Tobin Shalim Done. And I can't see CCP as going and rebalancing the whole weapon mechanics for fixing what was broken (inty's) with this patch in mind. Couldn't the same effect still be done by instead applying a stacking penalty to all ships for OD's and Nano's, minus the interceptor-class ships? This way we can still stack mods without penalty, the Snakes are still nerfed and a more general balance is achieved still. You eliminate the nano problem, but still have the interceptors retain their primary advantage/tank. This makes the most sense so far. There are plenty of ships that have special role bonuses. They ARE interceptors, after all. Ridiculous speed was the entire purpose. It trades off for an inability to pump out dps, and a glass chin. Creating an 'unfair' advantage for yourself, is the entire point of strategy, fitments, tactics, and all. If my Ares turns into nothing more than an easier to pop Enyo with no DPS.... "All ships are the same." Unbalance is what makes the game playable. If all ships are the same, then why buy a mega or a stilleto? It's not fair that they are sooo different, make them 'balanced' by making there be no difference in them at all.... Nerfing has become a little too Soviet around here. CC(C)P risks defeating the entire purpose of the game in search of 'equality.' I think nanoships are a real pain in my butt. But they have a place, and exist for a VALID reason. I've seen Vagabonds going faster than my Ares. Holy crap, GTFO! They're SUPPOSED to be OMGWTFBBQPWN fast. I guess I can stop training for T2 cruisers now, instead of get it just in time for it to be useless, like the Myrmidon x3.... Instead of nerfing them, why not encourage a response? Make the game grow, instead of stifle it? Where is the module that lets me buy special drones that can WARP without having to be a carrier?? Massive drawback, of course... Just an example, not specific to the current discussion really... But see what I mean? No innovation, just knocking everything down to 'equal.'
An Anarchyyt Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.08.04 02:28:00 - [53] Frankly, it seems that the hardest hit interceptor is the Taranis, as it is really the interceptor that is most "in your face" and that Scram boost will be the worst for it. Note: I don't know about Minmatar Interceptors. Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
Jack Gilligan THE MuPPeT FaCTOrY Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.08.04 02:40:00 - [54] Originally by: An Anarchyyt Frankly, it seems that the hardest hit interceptor is the Taranis, as it is really the interceptor that is most "in your face" and that Scram boost will be the worst for it. Note: I don't know about Minmatar Interceptors. Wrong. Crow is hardest hit... It's useless... Raptor was killed in the last patch, worth less than a Rifter. --- My opinions are my own and do not necessarily represent those of my corp or alliance.
An Anarchyyt Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.08.04 02:40:00 - [55] Edited by: An Anarchyyt on 04/08/2008 02:40:26 Originally by: Jack Gilligan Wrong. Crow is hardest hit... It's useless... That's the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Good job, that's a hard thing to do on these forums. Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
Jack Gilligan THE MuPPeT FaCTOrY Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.08.04 02:42:00 - [56] Originally by: An Anarchyyt Edited by: An Anarchyyt on 04/08/2008 02:40:26 Originally by: Jack Gilligan Wrong. Crow is hardest hit... It's useless... That's the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Good job, that's a hard thing to do on these forums. Crow is a missile boat... It's the SLOWEST of all inty's... It can't tank. It has the slowest speed. It's DEAD now. It has every disadvantage without any advantage. --- My opinions are my own and do not necessarily represent those of my corp or alliance.
Grim Mercy Tribal Liberation Force	Posted - 2008.08.04 02:45:00 - [57] I remember reading somewhere that T2 ships are not supposed to wtfbbqpwn a t1 version of the next-up ship class, ie: Inties aren't supposed to be able to solo cruisers. Did anyone else ever read or hear that?
Ash Vincetti Decorum Inc Tygris Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.04 03:02:00 - [58] Originally by: Grim Mercy I remember reading somewhere that T2 ships are not supposed to wtfbbqpwn a t1 version of the next-up ship class, ie: Inties aren't supposed to be able to solo cruisers. Did anyone else ever read or hear that? There's a big difference between being able to "wtfbbqpwn" a cruiser, and being able to do your intended role, which is hold a cruiser down. ----- free bree!
Tobin Shalim Vulcan Foundry United Star Federation	Posted - 2008.08.04 06:22:00 - [59] Originally by: Ash Vincetti Originally by: Grim Mercy I remember reading somewhere that T2 ships are not supposed to wtfbbqpwn a t1 version of the next-up ship class, ie: Inties aren't supposed to be able to solo cruisers. Did anyone else ever read or hear that? There's a big difference between being able to "wtfbbqpwn" a cruiser, and being able to do your intended role, which is hold a cruiser down. This. I'm not raising these points because suddenly I can't WTFOMGPWNBBQ!!!!! any kind of ship, be it a frig or cruiser. In fact, the only weapons I ever fitted on my Crow were rockets for the sole purpose of hitting any drones that caught up to me. The only thing I ever used my inty for was its intended role, and that is to jump in quickly to a ship, lock it down with a warp scram until backup arrives, and fly fast enough to avoid most of a ships damage. Since we can no longer last for any serious length of time, we have severely been nerfed as an entire profession unless some kind of buffs/bonuses are given to inty's. ----- Originally by: Haakkon I feel a great deal of patriotism at being a part of Goonswarm. We've accomplished great things... we're just mainly jerks about it
Furb Killer Gallente The first genesis Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2008.08.04 06:52:00 - [60] Imo it is pretty intresting to see that both interceptor pilots and especially nano hac pilots dont come much further than enormous ammount of whining that they will die more often. Sure some people give alternate ideas to nerf nanos, but that doesnt even come close to what needs to happen, keeps mwd mandatory, keeps ab pointless and keep AFs useless. Why arent they making usefull topics with what would need to be changed additionally to this patch to keep interceptors/vagabond viable? That can be for example that ODs should be slightly better than what is proposed, mass of interceptors/vaga lower, etc. But also for example decreasing effectiveness of (precission) light assault missiles. But right now all the nano users are whining about how warriors II drones will actually damage their ship... If people would make constructive posts (i am sure someone did but they are kinda hard to find between all the whining trolls), the chance on balance issues would be much smaller. But to do that you first got to accept that your i win button wont continue to exist in its current form. Then the next step is giving ideas to make sure that vagabonds, interceptors but also rapiers for example stay usefull without them being overpowered. Blobs are broken, we dont need broken nanos additionally because blobs are also broken... And nanos might kill blobs, but they also ruined non nano small gang/solo combat.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.